Literature DB >> 16458637

Quality of obstetric care and risk-adjusted primary cesarean delivery rates.

Jennifer L Bailit1, Thomas E Love, Neal V Dawson.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine the association between risk-adjusted primary cesarean delivery rates and maternal and neonatal outcomes. STUDY
DESIGN: California birth certificate data that were linked to hospital discharge data for 2001 were used to create a primary cesarean delivery rate risk-adjustment model. Two hundred eighty-five hospitals were divided into 3 groups that were above, below, or within expected rate confidence intervals. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were compared within each of the 3 hospital groupings.
RESULTS: Of the 285 hospitals, 27% had primary cesarean delivery rates that were above expected confidence intervals; 34% had primary cesarean delivery rates that were below expected confidence intervals, and 39% had primary cesarean delivery rates that were within expected confidence intervals. Neonatal asphyxia rates were higher in hospitals that had lower than expected rates of cesarean deliveries (0.05%, 0.1%, 0.07% for above, below, and within the confidence intervals, respectively; P < .0001). Maternal infection rates (2.1%, 2.3%, 1.8%, respectively; P < .0001) and third-degree tears (2.3%, 3.0%, 2.6%, respectively; P < .0001) were also higher in hospitals for which the cesarean delivery rates were above or below the expected rates.
CONCLUSION: Risk-adjusted primary cesarean delivery rates are a good marker for maternal and neonatal outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16458637     DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2005.07.045

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0002-9378            Impact factor:   8.661


  10 in total

1.  The role of race in cesarean delivery rate case mix adjustment.

Authors:  Jennifer L Bailit; Thomas E Love
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2007-10-01       Impact factor: 8.661

2.  Hospital volume and cesarean delivery among low-risk women in a nationwide sample.

Authors:  M A Clapp; K E James; A Melamed; J L Ecker; A J Kaimal
Journal:  J Perinatol       Date:  2017-11-09       Impact factor: 2.521

3.  Association between hospital-level obstetric quality indicators and maternal and neonatal morbidity.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Howell; Jennifer Zeitlin; Paul L Hebert; Amy Balbierz; Natalia Egorova
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2014-10-15       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Evaluating risk-adjusted cesarean delivery rate as a measure of obstetric quality.

Authors:  Sindhu K Srinivas; Corinne Fager; Scott A Lorch
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 7.661

5.  Risk adjustment in maternity care: the use of indirect standardization.

Authors:  James M Nicholson
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2010-08-20

6.  Risk-adjusted operative delivery rates and maternal-neonatal outcomes as measures of quality assessment in obstetric care: a multicenter prospective study.

Authors:  Gianpaolo Maso; Lorenzo Monasta; Monica Piccoli; Luca Ronfani; Marcella Montico; Francesco De Seta; Sara Parolin; Caterina Businelli; Laura Travan; Salvatore Alberico
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2015-02-05       Impact factor: 3.007

7.  Interinstitutional variation of caesarean delivery rates according to indications in selected obstetric populations: a prospective multicenter study.

Authors:  Gianpaolo Maso; Monica Piccoli; Marcella Montico; Lorenzo Monasta; Luca Ronfani; Sara Parolin; Carmine Gigli; Daniele Domini; Claudio Fiscella; Sara Casarsa; Carlo Zompicchiatti; Michela De Agostini; Attilio D'Atri; Raffaela Mugittu; Santo La Valle; Cristina Di Leonardo; Valter Adamo; Mara Fracas; Giovanni Del Frate; Monica Olivuzzi; Silvio Giove; Maria Parente; Daniele Bassini; Simona Melazzini; Secondo Guaschino; Caterina Businelli; Franco G Toffoletti; Diego Marchesoni; Alberto Rossi; Sergio Demarini; Laura Travan; Giorgio Simon; Sandro Zicari; Giorgio Tamburlini; Salvatore Alberico
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2013-06-25       Impact factor: 3.411

8.  Does hospital variation in intrapartum-related perinatal mortality among caesarean births reflect differences in quality of care? Cross-sectional study in 21 hospitals in Burkina Faso.

Authors:  Francesca L Cavallaro; Charles P Kabore; Rachel Pearson; Ruth M Blackburn; Soha Sobhy; Ana Pilar Betran; Carine Ronsmans; Alexandre Dumont
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-10-06       Impact factor: 3.006

9.  The application of the Ten Group classification system (TGCS) in caesarean delivery case mix adjustment. A multicenter prospective study.

Authors:  Gianpaolo Maso; Salvatore Alberico; Lorenzo Monasta; Luca Ronfani; Marcella Montico; Caterina Businelli; Valentina Soini; Monica Piccoli; Carmine Gigli; Daniele Domini; Claudio Fiscella; Sara Casarsa; Carlo Zompicchiatti; Michela De Agostinis; Attilio D'Atri; Raffaela Mugittu; Santo La Valle; Cristina Di Leonardo; Valter Adamo; Silvia Smiroldo; Giovanni Del Frate; Monica Olivuzzi; Silvio Giove; Maria Parente; Daniele Bassini; Simona Melazzini; Secondo Guaschino; Francesco De Seta; Sergio Demarini; Laura Travan; Diego Marchesoni; Alberto Rossi; Giorgio Simon; Sandro Zicari; Giorgio Tamburlini
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-06-05       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Cesarean Section and Maternal-fetal Mortality Rates in Nigeria: An Ecological Lens into the Last Decade.

Authors:  Hadiza Galadanci; Deepa Dongarwar; Wolfgang Künzel; Oladapo Shittu; Murtala Yusuf; Sadiq Abdurrahman; Dolapo Lufadeju; Hamisu M Salihu
Journal:  Int J MCH AIDS       Date:  2020-03-06
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.